RE: [Aroid-l] Names

To everyone exercised about plant
names (all of us for different reasons),

The sad thing about cultivar names
is that even if they are registered with an authority who are themselves
registered as the official body to receive the names, there is absolutely no
protection by having done this. Anyone can plonk a cultivar name on a plant
which they possess and can even register it (since the criteria for it being a
distinct plant and available for naming are quite bendable), and offer it for
sale under that name. The only protection is if the naming authority is really
on top of their job, and can get wide publicity to expose this duplicity.

I was hesitant to enter into this
discussion since I am supposed to be the registrar for aroids, and have fallen
down completely on the job. My excuse is that there are very, very few of the
cultivar names floating around which are eligible for registration, and I’m
not sure that I have the resources to track down for each one the vital fact of
their having been published with a description in a printed (hard copy, not
electronic) piece that is available to the public. So I cannot manage the base
lists for even the few genera in which cultivar names are supposed to exist. Note
that a cultivar name doesn’t exist as far as a registration authority is
concerned until it has been published in a printed piece and submitted to them.

So that is my mea culpa which is not relevant to the discussion,
but everyone should realize the one point made above which is that this whole
thing (registration and compliance) is voluntary, and we can bemoan people’s
activities all we like, but can only try to steer them to paths of
righteousness by example (or boycott !!)

This does not even address the plant
patent question, and the fact that a cultivar name cannot be patented since it
would not then be available for everyone to use (another provision of the
code).

Enjoy the plants, and hope that one
day uniform of naming come to pass …

Unfortunately the EU Plant Varieties Office and the US Patent and Trademark
Divisions don't communicate with each other very well, and none pay any
attention to the International Nomenclature Code. I've seen many cases
where a plant was patented under an invalid name in the US, a different invalid
name in the EU, and then illegally trademarked under a third different
name. It is only when the illegality is challenged by a private citizen
or company that the government takes action. The first case of an illegal
trademark being challenged just made it through the US Court system this year
with the court correctly ruling that all of the Stark Brothers trademarks are
invalid. With the oxalis, Charmed tm is a valid trademark for the series, but
the cultivar names which cannot include the trademark, become O. 'Wine' O.
'Jade', etc. Proven Winners catalog is a nomenclatural disaster.
They even introduced a Euphorbia under the cultivar 'Helena' when there was
already a different Euphorbia 'Helena' patented. If a plant is introduced
is under an invalid cultivar name, anyone can rename it in a proper
publication. If more people did this, these nurseries would learn.
An example would be the recent Echinacea 'CBG Cone3'. We simply renamed
the plant and published their illegal trademark name of 'Mango Meadowbrite' as
the official cultivar name. Unfortunately, most nurseries and breeders
that I discuss this with don't care or are defiant in breaking the law.
Often in the quest for maximizing profits, accuracy in the form of good
hardiness data and proper nomenclature is thrown out the window. people
forget that the reason horticultural nomenclature exists is so that we can all
communicate.

"I consider every plant hardy until I have killed it myself...at least three times" - Avent

Agoston Janos wrote:

Hey Tony,

You did it again! It is a very good article! Now we are not afraid any more.
All of our patented plants are named and sold only on patent and not on
cultivar name. But everywhere in catalogues we saw only the patented name not
cultivar name, moreover, we have ordered tulips, and there were no sign of
patent , but on the invoice there was. This is what you were talking about as
invalid trademarks.

Ver(r)y funny... Ha ha for others who did not read the article.

thank you for calling up my attention tho your findings!

Are there any other aroids which are trademarked (excluding Anthuriums and
Zantedeschias)?

Does anybody has experience with Timber Press? Any opinions about the Aroid
book (anybody can respond...)?

You brought up an interesting point about names. Internationally, there
can only be one valid cultivar name for a plant...not one for the US and one
for Europe. The improper dual plant naming is caused primarily by people
who either don't understand or are trying to illegally circumvent trademark
law. I understand that the EU Plant Varieties Act actually requires a new
plant to have a non-sensical cultivar name which isn't a real word. If
so, this violates the entire spirit of the International Nomenclature Code.
If this is true, I find it bizarre that members of the International
Nomenclature Code committee haven't put an end to this terrible practice.
Wilbert...feel free to chime in. If you would like to read more about
this problem, you can find my article, The Trademark Myth at http://www.plantdelights.com/Tony/trademark.html

It is common, that if a
variety is protected, 2 names are given to a variety, one for America and one
for Europe. A man in Hungary is breeding Oxalis. He have got 3 new varieties.
Oxalis triangularis Xalis (TM) 'Black Velvet', 'Frosted Jade', and 'Burgundy
Wine', but in America they are called different (now I cannot remember).

And that is another funny
thing if a breeder is coming out with a new variety in 1-3 years time many
other look alikes will be introduced too under a different name and
usally it is not protected.

Another:

Who has got the Aroids
book. What is your opinion about the book? Did you ever ordered anything from
Timber Press?